|
2008-12-24
, 19:41
|
|
Posts: 240 |
Thanked: 71 times |
Joined on Jun 2008
|
#2
|
|
2008-12-25
, 12:27
|
Posts: 449 |
Thanked: 29 times |
Joined on Jun 2006
|
#3
|
|
2008-12-25
, 16:13
|
|
Posts: 3,397 |
Thanked: 1,212 times |
Joined on Jul 2008
@ Netherlands
|
#4
|
|
2008-12-26
, 01:58
|
|
Posts: 1,605 |
Thanked: 1,601 times |
Joined on Mar 2007
@ Southern California
|
#6
|
|
2008-12-26
, 03:08
|
|
Posts: 4,783 |
Thanked: 1,253 times |
Joined on Aug 2007
@ norway
|
#7
|
|
2008-12-26
, 04:14
|
|
Posts: 1,076 |
Thanked: 176 times |
Joined on Mar 2007
|
#8
|
|
2008-12-26
, 13:14
|
|
Posts: 528 |
Thanked: 895 times |
Joined on Oct 2007
@ Moscow, Russia
|
#9
|
|
2008-12-26
, 14:24
|
|
Posts: 1,076 |
Thanked: 176 times |
Joined on Mar 2007
|
#10
|
First of all, it is really not that thin. Sure, one portion of the computer is super thin, but it thickens out very quickly near the back. The only thing that makes people think it is thin is fancy camera work and the unusually large capacity of manilla envelopes.
I then noticed that the device has an uncanny resemblance to my N810. Both have good battery life and are designed for some kind of portability. They are both intended for quickly browsing the web and other such tasks that are light on resources. My N810 only has one USB port, just like the Macbook Air, and accessing said USB port requires that I open a gate which renders the device incapable of sitting flat on a table. Neither has wired networking capability, instead relying entirely on WiFi.
Here's where the N810 comes out on top, though:
Hmm, do I sound bitter?
Last edited by Picklesworth; 2008-12-25 at 16:24.